Only valid for active forum users. Active means at least 30 postings within the last 30 days (no spam postings). This will automatically being checked at www.starbike.com shopping basket so make sure that you are logged in at the WW board!If there does not appear a WW discount position when you check out you do not have enough postings!

too bad tour mag has stopped publishing the english edition. looking at the aero data the 3t discus is the best. there is not plot points for a non-aero control wheelset. did anyone in germany buy this issue. curious what is the aero penalty vs traditional rim wheelsets

What I take from those graphs is that there is very little difference between any of those wheels for the average road cyclist. The vast majority of yaw angles experienced by cyclists is under 10%. Only if you are on the Kona ironman course are you really needing to think about wheels that perform well at 12 or 15 degrees.

And it's also a 60mm wheelset whereas most of the wheels tested from the other premium manufacturers were between 40 to 50, so you'd hope it was fast. Otherwise it looks like what was already mentioned - pretty much everything is pretty damn close these days.

I don't know if i'm reading the graph correctly but do these results show that a 202 rim will be as fast as a 404 or 303 in 0 degrees yaw, and actually faster at higher yaw angles?Seems like a no-brainer on which wheels are best.

Thanks Beaver! Where is this graph from?I find interesting that it totally busts the myth that testing tires on a roller in a lab is valid. It also gives us a clue why high tpi tubulars and open tubulars, which are more flexible, posiibly have a lower crr because of that. It finally confirms our empirical knowledge that a pressure around 90-100 psi is the best for most conditions.

kgt wrote:Thanks Beaver! Where is this graph from?I find interesting that it totally busts the myth that testing tires on a roller in a lab is valid. It also gives us a clue why high tpi tubulars and open tubulars, which are more flexible, posiibly have a lower crr because of that. It finally confirms our empirical knowledge that a pressure around 90-100 psi is the best for most conditions.

kgt wrote:Thanks Beaver! Where is this graph from?I find interesting that it totally busts the myth that testing tires on a roller in a lab is valid. It also gives us a clue why high tpi tubulars and open tubulars, which are more flexible, posiibly have a lower crr because of that. It finally confirms our empirical knowledge that a pressure around 90-100 psi is the best for most conditions.

I never noticed any big differences between wheels until I got 21mm inner width. When you ride on smooth asphalt and then get on rough tarmac with a 23mm tire on a 17C rim with 100psi you will notice an immediate increase in rolling resistance and probably change to a lower gear. With a 25mm tire on 21C with 60psi not so. And it doesn't feel slower on smooth asphalt either...

With aero wheels you notice a slight improvement when the wind comes from diagonally forward or descends at high speeds. But in all other cases...

kgt wrote:Thanks Beaver! Where is this graph from?I find interesting that it totally busts the myth that testing tires on a roller in a lab is valid. It also gives us a clue why high tpi tubulars and open tubulars, which are more flexible, posiibly have a lower crr because of that. It finally confirms our empirical knowledge that a pressure around 90-100 psi is the best for most conditions.

This only holds true for tire pressure (i.e. you can't keep increasing tire pressure to lower crr), not the rolling resistance of the tires themselves. The relative ranking of tires tested in the real world would still track the results of the roller tests because the primary drivers of energy loss is still going to be the same (e.g. hysteresis). So yes, tires with more flexible casings will perform better on the road, but they also performed better on rollers anyways (the top tires are usually supple casings, thin tread, little/no puncture protection).

So just like wind tunnel tests, you have to understand the results of rolling resistance tests in the context that they're done under specific conditions and how they apply to the real world is something you'd have to test on your own, for your own conditions.

Marin wrote:

L3X wrote:Can someone explain to me how significant these differences actually are? Like 0.16 vs. 0.17 at very extreme angles, so significant is this anyway?

Real world yaw angles will be 0 to 5° unless you are going very slow or are riding in the desert or on the seashore.

In track aero tests, shallow wheels perform very well, and the biggest difference is in tire width.